Re: 'Jerusalem IS Israel's capital'

Israel cannot survive without the West Bank. A "Palistinian" West Bank would simply be a much larger Gaza to serve as a base for rocket and terror attacks on every Israeli city. This was proven beyond doubt when Israel gave up Gaza exchanging "land for peace" and winding up with neither.

Israel cannot survive as a Democracy if they keep the Muslim population in the West Bank as Israeli citizens. The Muslim Israeli's will become a majority within a decade.

The "Old City" of Jerusalem is holy to all three Abrahamic religeons and MUST be placed under UN control to allow free access for all faiths to their holy sites in safety. That involves about 15% of the current modern city of Jerusalem.

Those are the irreducible realities we have to deal with when considering our policy in the Mideast. There is already a "two State Soultion" - a Jewish Arab State called Israel and a Muslim Arab State called Jordan.

Re: 'Jerusalem IS Israel's capital'

NO past president has made this move because they foresaw the negatives that would happen and none endorsed making this move if it would cause death, more violence, and a possible war. Now that Trump has recklessly made this move, all of those things are now on the table. All nations disagree with this move except for Israel and possibly Putin. Trump is a reckless moron.

So they were all for it unless the Palestinians were unhappy about it? That is insane - of course the Palestinians would be unhappy.

The Israelis invade, take over the Palistinian holy city, so now it belongs to the Israelis and the Palistinians can go pound sand?

Reminds me of how we try to explain all this to conservatives. What if Canada invaded Michigan, blockaded the country, and would not allow the Michigan citizens to vote in the "new" government? Conservative response? "That's silly. Canada would never do that" Sigh.

Re: 'Jerusalem IS Israel's capital'

What is good about Trump recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel? What good has become of it and what good will become of it?

Well, that is progress. Instead of all the "Hitler" nonsense the practicalities are explored. Honestly. I don't know for sure. However, since Presidents of both Parties and the US Congress has been thinking it was a good idea for over two decades, diplomatically there must be something there.

If nothing else it sends a signal - "Quit screwing around and let's resolve this thing". Clinton tried with Arafat and Ehud Barak and, after convincing Israel to "give away the farm", he still couldn't stop Arafat from wanting more. So, if nothing else, this "draws a line in the sand" and all will know that this President means it.

So to put it honestly and simply, you cannot say what good has become of this nor what good will become of this. Nothing but bad has come of this so far and there is no reason to believe that any good will.

Of course not. An attitude of 70 years duration does not get changed over night. It will take time for the Palestinian leadership to digest the new ground rules and then decide what they want to do.

I guess when and if the U.S. Embassy is moved there You will say that is good. Then when the U.S.Embassy gets attacked (and it will), you'll try and blame it on the Secretary of State, but only if that is a Democrat.

How silly!!! Why should I blame it on anyone but the terrorists? How do you come up with these crazy mindreading exercises?

NO past president has made this move because they foresaw the negatives that would happen and none endorsed making this move if it would cause death, more violence, and a possible war. Now that Trump has recklessly made this move, all of those things are now on the table. All nations disagree with this move except for Israel and possibly Putin. Trump is a reckless moron.

So they were all for it unless the Palestinians were unhappy about it? That is insane - of course the Palestinians would be unhappy.

Re: 'Jerusalem IS Israel's capital'

What is good about Trump recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel? What good has become of it and what good will become of it?

Well, that is progress. Instead of all the "Hitler" nonsense the practicalities are explored. Honestly. I don't know for sure. However, since Presidents of both Parties and the US Congress has been thinking it was a good idea for over two decades, diplomatically there must be something there.

If nothing else it sends a signal - "Quit screwing around and let's resolve this thing". Clinton tried with Arafat and Ehud Barak and, after convincing Israel to "give away the farm", he still couldn't stop Arafat from wanting more. So, if nothing else, this "draws a line in the sand" and all will know that this President means it.

So to put it honestly and simply, you cannot say what good has become of this nor what good will become of this. Nothing but bad has come of this so far and there is no reason to believe that any good will.

I guess when and if the U.S. Embassy is moved there You will say that is good. Then when the U.S.Embassy gets attacked (and it will), you'll try and blame it on the Secretary of State, but only if that is a Democrat.

NO past president has made this move because they foresaw the negatives that would happen and none endorsed making this move if it would cause death, more violence, and a possible war. Now that Trump has recklessly made this move, all of those things are now on the table. All nations disagree with this move except for Israel and possibly Putin. Trump is a reckless moron.

"The only thing man learns from history is man learns nothing from history"